Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation Project Prioritization topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Beaufort County workshop directs staff to refine plan to finish 2018 sales-tax projects and study a capital sales tax

3092909 · March 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a March 18 workshop, Beaufort County Council discussed narrowing remaining projects from the 2018 sales-tax referendum — focused on the Ladies Island corridor and county pathways — and asked staff to return with a detailed plan and timeline, including exploring a capital-projects sales tax option for 2026.

Beaufort County Council held a workshop on March 18 to review unfinished projects from the county's 2018 sales-tax referendum and to consider options for a new sales-tax referendum in 2026. County staff outlined prioritized, scaled-back lists of projects for the Ladies Island corridor and for the county pathways program and asked for council direction on next steps, including establishing a citizen commission and producing visual materials and cost estimates for public outreach.

The workshop matters because it set the county's near-term approach to roughly $58 million staff said is available to complete remaining 2018-referendum projects and because council members signaled preference to pursue a capital-projects sales tax — a broader revenue tool that can fund buildings, parks and infrastructure — rather than narrower, transportation-only measures.

County staff summarized the finances and recommended priorities. Jared Bodd, county staff, said the county originally collected about $146.5 million under the 2018 referendum and has spent roughly $31 million, leaving multiple project pots and about $11 million in unobligated funds. He told the council that, after accounting for the Ladies Island corridor and pathways allocations, staff currently estimates about $58 million is available to apply to the remaining projects.

Staff proposed right-sizing the Ladies Island corridor work to focus on a short list of safety and traffic-flow projects rather than the corridor’s full long-range plan. The proposed core items and rough cost estimates presented to council included: a reconfiguration of the main intersection around U.S. 21/SC-802 to add turning lanes and signal/pedestrian improvements (estimated $4 million); a 1,500-foot four-lane widening through the Walmart area with storm drainage work (about $8 million); improvements at the Ladies Island Middle School access and Cougar Drive, including a signal; targeted access-road work (paving and intersection fixes at Hazel Farm/Gay and other side streets); traffic calming and a raised intersection on Sunset/Miller (about $2 million); and finishing the Airport Frontage Road design (staff recommended spending roughly $150,000 to complete design so the project would be shovel-ready). Staff presented that combining the principal Ladies Island elements and access-road work would total roughly $24 million–$25 million of the available allocation.

On pathways, staff displayed the county’s BC Connects master plan and recommended concentrating on priority groups of the 24 originally listed pathways. Staff identified roughly $28 million in near-term pathway priorities (priority tiers 1–3) and said a number of projects are at or near construction-ready status (for example, All Joy Road, Salem Road, Stewart Point and Depot). Burnt Church Road was highlighted as a high-priority pathway but staff said its original combined road-and-pathway design (previously funded by impact fees and earlier sales-tax plans) now requires separation: if the council wants just the pathway built, staff would redesign it separately from the larger road widening, and the county would not have funds to do both the road project and the original combined design.

Council members repeatedly urged staff to produce visuals (before-and-after renderings and maps) and clear cost estimates for each candidate project so residents can see what would be delivered. Several council members also stressed the need for geographic equity and for municipal buy-in; staff noted most of the remaining pathway and corridor work lies in unincorporated Beaufort County and in the City of Beaufort.

On revenue options, staff explained three common referendum tools in South Carolina: transportation-only sales tax (longer-term, up to 25 years), capital-projects sales tax (up to eight years, can cover buildings and broader capital needs), and the local-option sales tax structure that rolls back property tax while allocating a smaller capital/revenue share to local governments. Staff flagged that the local-option model defers a significant portion of revenue back to taxpayers (a “rollback”) and yields a smaller direct fund for county projects; staff said Department of Revenue (DOR) calculations previously estimated a local-option example would produce about $75 million annually in gross collections statewide under the modeled scenario, with Beaufort County’s direct project share in that example about $9 million per year (the presentation stressed DOR performs the official apportionment calculations and that formulas are complex).

Council direction and next steps: members agreed staff should return with a detailed resolution, maps, refined cost estimates, an outreach plan with renderings, and a proposed timeline for public engagement. Multiple council members asked staff to establish a citizen commission by this summer to vet project nominations from municipalities and the public, to compile a prioritized list, and to produce a final project package the council would consider sending to voters. At the end of the workshop, council members indicated a preference to see more detail on a capital-projects sales tax (the “capital penny”) and asked staff for a follow-up workshop with a draft timeline and sample ballot language or project lists.

Two procedural motions recorded in the meeting: the agenda was approved by unanimous consent at the start of the session, and the meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at the end.

Staff said they will return to council with the materials requested — maps, photo simulations, refined cost estimates, commission-formation options and a timeline for a possible referendum — and officials set a follow-up workshop for additional direction and review.